The researchers consistently discovered a black-ape association even if the young adults said they knew nothing about its historical connotations. The connection was made only with African American faces; the paper’s third study failed to find an ape association with other non-white groups, such as Asians.

In case you’re wondering about those historical connections, this (perhaps biased) source has a couple of pointers.

Daily Kos has an email account of the attack:

She told me that the gas was sprayed into the room where the babies and children were being kept while their mothers prayed together their Ramadan prayers. Panicked mothers ran for their babies, crying for their children so they could flee from the gas that was burning their eyes and throats and lungs. She grabbed her youngest in her arms and grabbed the hand of her other daughter, moving with the others to exit the building and the irritating substance there.

‘To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail,’ wrote Mark Twain. In the current context this means that the organizations charged with reacting to this catastrophe will do so by doing what they have always done, only more of it. Congress, which controls the budget and passes laws, will want to pass laws and to allocate more money, lots of money, forgetting completely about any campaign promises. The military, which is the nation’s enforcer, will want to use force, if only they can find a foe. The intelligence community, which gathers information, will want to be even more energetic in that gathering, no matter what the cost to the privacy of the millions of us who aren’t thinking of terrorist acts. And agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration, which regulate, will want to create more stringent regulations. Now here is an important point to be remembered: All these parties will want to do these things WHETHER THEY ARE WARRANTED OR USEFUL OR NOT.

• That’s a lot of Germans
• Look how few Norwegians in Minnesota. Take that, Garrison!
• Other = Cuba or Hawaiian
• Mormons are English. Sorry about that
• BIG surprise for Puerto Rico
• The data for Florida is heavily skewed, because most of the ancestors there haven’t died yet

(HT: Electoral Vote)

*Obviously there are ethical reasons why not, as well as ethical reasons why. My point is that it’s interesting to see such an impact, not whether it’s right or wrong.

I was having dinner with a group of friends about a month ago, and one of them was talking about sitting with his four-year-old daughter watching a DVD. And in the middle of the movie, apropos nothing, she jumps up off the couch and runs around behind the screen. That seems like a cute moment. Maybe she’s going back there to see if Dora is really back there or whatever. But that wasn’t what she was doing. She started rooting around in the cables. And her dad said, “What you doing?” And she stuck her head out from behind the screen and said, “Looking for the mouse.”

Having said that he was a smart guy, or at least one who knew a lot which is a fair substitute. That much I knew, but it turns out that he was also instrumental in raising £100 million for charity (that’s what, about 8 trillion dollars?) I don’t really believe in ‘better’ or ‘worse’ to describe people, but if I did I’d say he was a better person than me.

The thesis was that we’re willing to grant people rights, but they have to show that they deserve them by participating in the community. That participation can be pretty minimal. The interviewee pointed to the history of Chinese people in the UK; they have a tendency to keep to themselves in a number of Chinatowns, but that’s seen by the rest of the community as more of a preference than a harmful insularity, and more importantly they’re good neighbours. As trivial as that sounds, it is distinct from some Islamic communities, which (regardless of what the truth actually is) are seen to hold themselves separate and in some senses ‘better’ than the community at large, and also aren’t seen to ‘play the game’ as part of society.

This certainly struck a chord with me. I’m not naturally a Conservative voter, but I can sympathize with their frustration that so many people don’t play their part (regardless of Thatcher’s claim that there is no such thing as society). It’s difficult to image the transformation in any society if, for example, all criminals decided to go straight, or slackers decided to work harder, or everyone decided to volunteer just an hour a month to a cause. It’s an illusory hope, based on the idea that an individuals could improve their lot just by applying themselves, but a seductive one nonetheless.

Whether conscious or not, society consists of bargains struck. X give up Y to get the assurance of Z, where X = pensioners or motorists or children, and both Y and Z are generally money or the things that money can buy. One of the assumptions inherent in these trade-offs is that my group is OK with other groups getting theirs, so long as we get ours. I don’t mind paying health insurance when I don’t really need it to keep your premiums, for example, but in due course someone will do the same for me.

This system can break down when one group doesn’t want to help another out, though in most cases a mixture of numbers and inertia prevents this from holding sway for long. The bigger threat is when a group gets so big that its desires can overwhelm those of smaller groups, but it isn’t big enough that its largesse can handle the needs of lesser collections. That could be the case with Baby Boomers in the next 20 years (until their numbers start to dwindle); the worries that they have over their futures could translate into demands that set unsustainable expectations for future generations, winning them the distinction of being the real ‘me’ generation.